H2H data updated: 2026-07-19 14:15 UTC
Emilio Sanchez vs Pavel Slozil H2H: 1-0
Emilio Sanchez holds a 1–0 lead over Pavel Slozil in their ATP head-to-head. Across 1 main-draw meeting, Emilio Sanchez leads 1–0 on clay. Most recently, Emilio Sanchez won the 1986 Gstaad fourth round 6-3 6-2.
Want to explore more matchups? Advanced rivalry search lets you browse current and historical rivalries, unbeaten records, or every matchup for a player.
ESP
Age 61
Right-Handed
180 cm / 5'11"
H2H
1
–
0
1 main draw meetings
CZE
Age 70
Right-Handed
173 cm / 5'8"
H2H Match Log
| Date | Tournament | Category | Round | Surface | Winner | Score | Loser | Match |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 11, 1986* | Gstaad | ATP 250 | R16 | Clay | Emilio Sanchez | 6-3 6-2 | Pavel Slozil | Match data |
* Estimated match date where the exact historical date is unavailable.
Career Comparison
| Player | Current | Peak | Pts | Elo | W | L | Win % | GS | 1000 | Finals | 500 | 250 | Titles |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emilio Sanchez | #1,301 | #7 | 1,634 | 2,038 | 402 | 272 | 59.6% | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 15 |
| Pavel Slozil | #550 | #12 | 0 | 1,790 | 142 | 160 | 47.0% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
Career Progression by Age
Seasons are aligned by the age each player spent most of that calendar year. GS and Titles are cumulative career totals through that season.
| Age | Emilio Sanchez | Pavel Slozil | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | Yr | W-L | Win % | Rank | Elo | GS | Titles | |
| 19 | 1984 | 9–12 | 42.9% | #111 | 1,545 | 0 | 0 | 1975 | 1–6 | 14.3% | #218 | 1,481 | 0 | 0 |
| 20 | 1985 | 16–14 | 53.3% | #64 | 1,668 | 0 | 0 | 1976 | 1–5 | 16.7% | #310 | 1,444 | 0 | 0 |
| 21 | 1986 | 52–23 | 69.3% | #16 | 1,841 | 0 | 3 | 1977 | 0–2 | 0.0% | #226 | 1,418 | 0 | 0 |
| 22 | 1987 | 56–23 | 70.9% | #17 | 1,870 | 0 | 7 | 1978 | 5–5 | 50.0% | #190 | 1,509 | 0 | 0 |
| 23 | 1988 | 39–19 | 67.2% | #17 | 1,907 | 0 | 8 | 1979 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #78 | 1,655 | 0 | 0 |
| 24 | 1989 | 37–16 | 69.8% | #19 | 1,871 | 0 | 9 | 1980 | 10–10 | 50.0% | #68 | 1,700 | 0 | 0 |
| 25 | 1990 | 48–24 | 66.7% | #8 | 1,812 | 0 | 11 | 1981 | 18–16 | 52.9% | #68 | 1,719 | 0 | 1 |
| 26 | 1991 | 40–22 | 64.5% | #14 | 1,823 | 0 | 14 | 1982 | 19–18 | 51.4% | #49 | 1,677 | 0 | 1 |
| 27 | 1992 | 40–25 | 61.5% | #21 | 1,783 | 0 | 15 | 1983 | 22–21 | 51.2% | #81 | 1,679 | 0 | 1 |
| 28 | 1993 | 28–26 | 51.9% | #41 | 1,686 | 0 | 15 | 1984 | 21–17 | 55.3% | #40 | 1,732 | 0 | 1 |
| 29 | 1994 | 17–26 | 39.5% | #74 | 1,628 | 0 | 15 | 1985 | 18–26 | 40.9% | #95 | 1,643 | 0 | 2 |
| 30 | 1995 | 13–22 | 37.1% | #108 | 1,587 | 0 | 15 | 1986 | 8–16 | 33.3% | #165 | 1,587 | 0 | 2 |
| 31 | 1996 | 7–16 | 30.4% | #173 | 1,505 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 32 | 1997 | 0–4 | 0.0% | #1056 | 1,467 | 0 | 15 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |